Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

i just did a little looking at specs. something else you may want to think about is that the silvia has a slightly wider front track than a 32, has lower and skinnier body (so it MAY have less drag at speed).

also 20kg may not seem like a big difference in weight, but in a lower power vehicle it can be enough over a few laps to determine what position you are in.

i just did a little looking at specs. something else you may want to think about is that the silvia has a slightly wider front track than a 32, has lower and skinnier body (so it MAY have less drag at speed).

also 20kg may not seem like a big difference in weight, but in a lower power vehicle it can be enough over a few laps to determine what position you are in.

the track issue is easily fixed, same as we do on S series chassis.... by fitting R33 lower control arms (among other things).

Nah sorry i build a few CA's and alot of Sr's. I dropped the latest CA build to Drift garage/UPgarage in nsw last week and i cannot lift the 'long' CA at all.... the SR on the other hand i can manouver around my workshop my self.

the 26 in our s13 puts about 30-45kg more over the front axle.

What does the CA weigh then? What does the SR weigh? Provided their accessories are identical, and do not have transmissions.

I got my information from a pretty reliable source. I do not have proof, but neither do you..

Could you get both motors on a scale to confirm?

What does the CA weigh then? What does the SR weigh? Provided their accessories are identical, and do not have transmissions.

I got my information from a pretty reliable source. I do not have proof, but neither do you..

Could you get both motors on a scale to confirm?

mate if i can lift one but not the other then they weigh differrent...... proof enough for me. (long bare engines, maybe loaded with access they are heavier)

if anyone needs a newly built 300rwkw CA (long motor) i have a spare one... oh and a fully built SR filled with Trust cams, rods and pistons out of cats car (just had re-fresh) and a Forged (arias) SR20 also fresh.

on the scales at drift day

S13 Sr20 manual turbo 1200kg average

R32 rb20 turbo manual 1320 avrage

S13 Rb20 manual turbo 1260kg

R32 with Sr20 1260

Note CA S13 was definetly lower then SR, i dunno if thats the body(88 - 91 car) or what but they where around 1160 kg.

I would say 60kg between SR and RB20 including manifolds(yes 6 has heavier everything) and gearbox(sr / rb20 same same).

Fully stripped out Silvias got down to 1040 kg for interest sake :P

Edited by Butters
on the scales at drift day

S13 Sr20 manual turbo 1200kg average

R32 rb20 turbo manual 1320 avrage

S13 Rb20 manual turbo 1260kg

R32 with Sr20 1260

Note CA S13 was definetly lower then SR, i dunno if thats the body(88 - 91 car) or what but they where around 1160 kg.

yeah you are comparing cars not engines..... our s13 weighed 1100 with sr last year at EC.... and 1200 with rb... but the engine is not 100kg heavier. The CA cars do weigh less maily due to equipment not engines. Hicas / non hicas, sunroof etc all play a part.

yeah you are comparing cars not engines..... our s13 weighed 1100 with sr last year at EC.... and 1200 with rb... but the engine is not 100kg heavier. The CA cars do weigh less maily due to equipment not engines.

Did i say i was comparing anything other then cars ? :P

the CA S13 car has all the same features as An SR one I think ?

so not sure where the extra car weight comes from.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...